Hokkien is NOT a dialect

I am an active member of various Facebook groups, some local and others international. One of the local groups I belong to is administered by Timothy Tye, an Old Free, just like me, and it's called "Learn Penang Hokkien." Yesterday, I came across a thought-provoking post by a fellow member, Ian Chai, which called for a reconsideration of the term "Dialects" (方言).

He raised a pertinent question: Why are Hokkien, Cantonese, Teochew, and other Chinese regional languages classified as dialects while Mandarin is referred to as a language? I wholeheartedly share his query. Why indeed are they labeled as dialects when their histories date back centuries before Mandarin, and they deserve recognition instead of being marginalized?

Take, for instance, Hokkien, which is said to have evolved from Old Chinese and Middle Chinese (dating back to the Shang and Zhou dynasties from the 14th to the 3rd centuries BCE). With this extensive history, it ranks as one of the oldest and most well-preserved Chinese regional languages.

In contrast, Mandarin traces its roots to the Yuan and Ming dynasties (from the 13th century), where it began evolving from earlier Northern Chinese dialects. It wasn't until the Qing Dynasty that it became the foundation for standardized Mandarin used in official government communications and education.

Therefore, when considering the longer historical perspective, Hokkien emerges as the more ancient language, with roots dating back to the early stages of the Chinese language itself. Mandarin gained prominence primarily through political developments and administrative centers in later periods. Similar assessments can likely be made for other major Chinese regional languages such as Cantonese, Teochew, and more.

Ian Chai's compelling argument, outlined below, deserves broader recognition. It's high time for Hokkien, Cantonese, and all other Chinese regional languages to assert their importance and historical significance. Acknowledging these languages enriches our cultural heritage and enhances our understanding of linguistic diversity.

Rethinking the Translation of 方言

In our globalized world, language holds immense power in shaping our identity, culture, and relationships. Yet, the term "dialect" has often been misapplied to regional linguistic variations, leading to misunderstandings and undermining the unique heritage of languages such as Hokkien, Cantonese, Hakka, and more. It is time to reevaluate our approach and accurately refer to these as "regional languages" rather than mere "dialects" of Mandarin, acknowledging their distinct origins, historical significance, and lack of mutual intelligibility.

First and foremost, labeling Hokkien, Cantonese, Hakka, and similar languages as "dialects" of Mandarin belittles their rich historical roots. These regional languages have ancient origins that predate Mandarin itself. By using the term "regional languages," we pay homage to their individual histories, which have developed independently over centuries. The term "dialect" inaccurately implies that these languages are offshoots of Mandarin, overshadowing their unique linguistic evolution.

Furthermore, the misconception that these regional languages are dialects of Mandarin stems from the fallacy of mutual intelligibility. Unlike variations like the Cockney accent and the Queen's English, where speakers can generally understand each other despite differences, regional languages like Hokkien and Cantonese are not mutually intelligible with Mandarin. This key distinction is a testament to their linguistic diversity and independence. Therefore, applying the label "regional languages" rightfully acknowledges their inherent differences and the necessity for distinct linguistic categorization.

The misclassification of these languages as "dialects" also perpetuates a skewed hierarchy that undermines their cultural significance. By using the term "regional languages," we grant them the recognition they deserve, highlighting their pivotal role in preserving cultural traditions, storytelling, and artistic expression. These languages encapsulate the nuances of the diverse communities that speak them, fostering connections across generations and strengthening cultural identity.

In advocating for a shift to referring to Hokkien, Cantonese, Hakka, and their counterparts as "regional languages," we empower ourselves to appreciate linguistic diversity in its truest form. This change in terminology not only respects the historical lineage of these languages but also underscores the importance of embracing linguistic richness. It challenges the stereotypes that linguistic variations must be secondary to the "standard" and encourages a deeper understanding of the complex tapestry of languages that shape our world.

In conclusion, it is evident that the term "dialect" inadequately represents the uniqueness and significance of languages like Hokkien, Cantonese, and Hakka. By embracing the term "regional languages," we honor their distinct histories, acknowledge their lack of mutual intelligibility with Mandarin, and celebrate their vital role in cultural preservation. Let us collectively recognize the power of words in shaping perceptions and promote a more accurate and inclusive terminology that reflects the true essence of these linguistic treasures.

The "new" old Straits Echo building

In recent weeks, I've observed a welcome transformation taking place at the old Straits Echo building, situated at the crossroads of Penang Road and Dato Koyah Road. While I'm uncertain about the driving force behind this restoration, I can't help but marvel at the renewed splendor this building now exudes. After the closure of the newspaper in the 1980s, the Kayu Nasi Kandar group briefly occupied the premises. I vaguely recall that there may have been an outlet here at one point, but it met a rather swift demise, leaving the building vacant.

Seeing this building restored to its former glory today is a source of satisfaction, although, during my brief stint at the Straits Echo in the past, it was far from the pristine condition it boasts now. Nonetheless, back then, it served as a bustling newspaper office, with the printing press situated at the rear of the building. Nighttime was a hive of activity, with staff diligently working, machines whirring to print and fold the next day's edition, local news vendors eagerly awaiting their supply of the Straits Echo newspaper, and vans lined up to collect newspapers for distribution to places like Taiping, Ipoh, and Kuala Lumpur.

As I reminisce about those newspaper vans, memories flood back to the mid-1970s when I was studying in Petaling Jaya. Those delivery vans doubled as a popular means of transportation for students commuting between Kuala Lumpur and Penang. When evening fell in KL, we would congregate, if my recollection serves me right, somewhere along Jalan Walter Grenier in the vicinity of Ipoh Road, eagerly awaiting the arrival of these vans with their cargo of newspapers. For a modest fare, we'd hop aboard for the journey back home to Penang, often falling asleep during the ride and waking up to stretch our legs whenever the vans made brief stops in small towns along the way to unload their newspaper bundles.

For me, journey's end was Butterworth, where I would then catch the ferry to the island. From there, I'd hop on a bus to return to my family home on Seang Tek Road, surprising my folks with my unannounced arrival. Those were indeed the days of carefree living, filled with youthful adventures and spontaneous journeys.